Skip to main content

Security report for viator.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 2 other checks.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

The website www.viator.com is currently inaccessible due to a security mechanism presenting a CAPTCHA challenge, preventing direct content access and analysis. The WHOIS lookup for the domain returned no match, indicating either the domain is not registered under this exact name or privacy protections are in place. Due to the lack of accessible content, no metadata, business information, or contact details could be extracted. The technical infrastructure appears to include third-party CAPTCHA services to mitigate automated access, but no further technology stack or hosting details are available. Security posture cannot be properly evaluated given the blocked content, but the absence of visible security headers or SSL information is a concern. Overall, the site’s risk assessment is limited by the lack of data, but the presence of a WAF or bot protection suggests an intent to protect the site from automated threats. Strategic recommendations include enabling public access for analysis, publishing clear privacy and security policies, and improving transparency in domain registration.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  2. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

  3. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching viator.com

This scan found 20 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
67
Security headers
75
Email security
70
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
71

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Due to the absence of accessible content and WHOIS data, no definitive business intelligence can be derived. The domain name suggests association with Viator, a known travel and tours booking platform, but this cannot be confirmed from the provided data. No information on market positioning, revenue streams, or partnerships is available. Without access to the website’s content or metadata, insights into customer segments or growth indicators are not possible.

Security posture

The security posture assessment is severely limited by the CAPTCHA challenge blocking content access. No security headers or SSL configuration details were found. The use of a third-party CAPTCHA service indicates some level of bot mitigation. However, the absence of visible privacy policies, contact information for incident response, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms suggests gaps in security transparency and compliance. No evidence of GDPR compliance or data protection officer contact was found.

Recommendations

  1. Enable access to website content for security and compliance analysis by adjusting WAF or CAPTCHA settings.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  3. Implement and expose security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security incident response channels.
  5. Register domain with transparent WHOIS information or justify privacy protection for trustworthiness.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Page content is a CAPTCHA challenge iframe from captcha-delivery.com indicating a WAF or bot protection mechanism blocking direct access. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor

Technology

Stack
captcha-delivery.com script

Analytics and tracking

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is inaccessible due to a CAPTCHA challenge.
  2. No meaningful HTML content or metadata available for analysis.
  3. WHOIS data is unavailable or domain may not be registered under www.viator.com.
  4. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies detected.
  5. No contact information or business details found in the provided content.
  6. Security headers and SSL configuration could not be assessed.
  7. External scripts are limited to captcha-delivery.com services.
  8. No analytics, advertising, or tracking scripts detected.
  9. Content safety is rated safe due to lack of content.
  10. Overall analysis is incomplete due to WAF/security blocking.
Technical notes

Notes

The technical analysis is constrained by the lack of accessible content. The only detected technology is a CAPTCHA service from captcha-delivery.com, indicating bot protection measures. No CMS, frameworks, or hosting providers could be identified. The HTML content is minimal and lacks metadata, structured data, or SEO elements. Performance, accessibility, and mobile optimization cannot be assessed. The site likely relies on external services for security but lacks visible technical maturity indicators.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 67/100 −11Medium31 findingsView report
  2. 78/100Low22 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with viator.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review viator.com.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.